1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a patient device which has a wireless, bidirectional interface for the bidirectional transmission of data between the patient device and an implant such as a cardiac pacemaker, implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD), or the like. In addition, the patient device has a second interface for remote data communication with a central service center.
2. Description of the Related Art
Patient devices of this type are fundamentally known in various forms and allow a cardiac pacemaker or defibrillator patient to be monitored in regard to the function of the implant or the physiological data detected by the implant even outside a doctor's office or a hospital. Modern implants of the cited type, implantable cardiac pacemakers or implantable cardioverters/defibrillators, are capable of detecting manifold physiological data which provides information about the development of the particular (cardiac) illness of the patient. On this basis, the particular implant may provide the particular best possible treatment for the patient independently or after corrective and/or programming intervention of the physician. The data detected on the part of the implant includes, for example, intracardial electrocardiograms, which may be transmitted remotely with the aid of a corresponding implant and the associated patient device to a central service center and analyzed by a physician there or made available to a physician for analysis from there. Other data which may be transmitted from the implant to the service center is operational data of the implant such as its battery status or the like, for example. To transmit this data, the patient device has a first, implant-side interface on one hand, which is implemented having a transceiver for communication with a corresponding interface of the implant. In addition, the patient device has a second interface for the remote data communication with the service center. In the simplest case, this second interface is a telephone modem. Known alternatives are, for example, all conceivable variants of an Internet connection or a data link via a mobile wireless network.
Programming the implant via the two above-mentioned interfaces of the patient device has already been considered in the prior art. The possibility of remote programming of the implant via the patient device from the service center results in this way. The cited remote programming of the implant via a service center has not been successful up to this point, probably because in this conceivable variant, firstly technical problems result, such as the question of data security and integrity, but also because, if an implant is remotely programmed by the service center, an attending physician, who may immediately engage to help in case of doubt, is typically not on location at the patient.
A currently typical scenario therefore appears as follows: For example, an intracardial ECG which represents a critical state of the patient, or operational data of the implant which requires urgent handling, is received in the central service center. In this case, the physician attending the particular patient is immediately informed by the service center and may summon the affected patient to him or visit him personally. The physician may then perform further diagnoses in direct proximity to the patient and perform possibly required further queries on the implant or reprogramming of the implant with the aid of a typical programming device. The data communication between programming device and implant also occurs wirelessly, but via another, essentially shorter-range inductive data link between implant and a programming head of the programming device. This programming head of the programming device must be brought in direct proximity to the implant and typically laid directly on the skin of the patient for the data communication with the implant. The advantage of a short-range data communication of this type is that the danger of interference and malfunctions of the data transmission link is quite low. Because the proximity of a physician is desirable in any case in most cases, the requirement of the proximity of a physician also does not appear to be a disadvantage.
Nonetheless, the need exists to improve the scenario corresponding to the prior art, without having to accept the disadvantages of the suggested alternatives.